Young Diplomats

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines paradox as “one (such as a person, situation, or action) having seemingly contradictory qualities or phases”, which is exactly the situation that Colombia is currently going through.
The past 7 of august, Ivan Duque, the new president of Colombia, elected the past June, began his mandate with a speech that proclaimed political reconciliation between the right and the left wing, as his main goal. The youngest president in Colombian history won against Gustavo Petro, a extreme left candidate, thanks to his belonging in the political party of extreme right “Centro Democrático”, which was found by Alvaro Uribe Velez, a Colombian ex president who is no stranger to controversies.

In 2016, M. Uribe was the major adversary against the peace treaty in Colombia with the guerilla group “Las FARC” as it was agreed and was the head of the No campaign that won the peace plebiscite back in October 2016 with 50,23% of the votes with the catchphrase “Peace yes but not like this” (Paz sí pero no así), when Ivan Duque was a senator that no one knew about.
Despite the result, Juan Manuel Santos, the president at the time, signed the peace treaty and ignored the vote, decision he took after he was awarded with the Nobel Peace Prize and got together with the representatives of the No campaign, M. Uribe included, to change some of the parts of the treaty. In fact, Duque won with promises of radically changing the peace treaty and even with the idea of ending it.

Although M. Uribe is clearly not the new president, he is currently a senator on his second mandate and the head of the party’s President with a great influence over him, as is not a secret for anybody that Duque won just because of him. That’s why some has accused M. Uribe to be a puppeteer that wants to perpetuate itself in the power, even if the only way is throughout another person since he was forbidden to do a third presidential term in 2010 by a decision of the Colombian Constitutional Court after the green light by the congress.

Now, Ivan Duque, and Colombia, face the challenge of speaking about reconciliation after the peace treaty with “Las Farc” and probable futures ones with other insurgent groups like the ELN, when at the same time M. Uribe and his party proclaim every time they have the chance a clear anti-reconciliation speech. Which one of the two speeches will prevail? Will the 42 years old president stay independent? Only time will tell.

GENEVA (AP) – Kofi Annan, one of the world’s most celebrated diplomats and a charismatic symbol of the United Nations who rose through its ranks to become the first black African secretary-general, has died. He was 80.

This article was written by The Daily Mail Online and published here

His foundation announced his death in Switzerland on Saturday in a tweet , saying he died after a short unspecified illness.

“Wherever there was suffering or need, he reached out and touched many people with his deep compassion and empathy,” the foundation said.

FILE – In this Thursday, Oct. 14, 2010 file photo former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan speaks at the World Food Prize Symposium in Des Moines, Iowa. Annan, one of the world’s most celebrated diplomats and a charismatic symbol of the United Nations who rose through its ranks to become the first black African secretary-general, has died. He was 80. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall, File)

Annan spent virtually his entire career as an administrator in the United Nations. His aristocratic style, cool-tempered elegance and political savvy helped guide his ascent to become its seventh secretary-general, and the first hired from within. He served two terms from Jan. 1, 1997, to Dec. 31, 2006, capped nearly mid-way when he and the U.N. were jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2001.

During his tenure, Annan presided over some of the worst failures and scandals at the world body, one of its most turbulent periods since its founding in 1945. Challenges from the outset forced him to spend much of his time struggling to restore its tarnished reputation.

His enduring moral prestige remained largely undented, however, both through charisma and by virtue of having negotiated with most of the powers in the world.

When he departed from the United Nations, he left behind a global organization far more aggressively engaged in peacekeeping and fighting poverty, setting the framework for the U.N.’s 21st-century response to mass atrocities and its emphasis on human rights and development.

“Kofi Annan was a guiding force for good,” current U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said. “It is with profound sadness that I learned of his passing. In many ways, Kofi Annan was the United Nations. He rose through the ranks to lead the organization into the new millennium with matchless dignity and determination.”

Even out of office, Annan never completely left the U.N. orbit. He returned in special roles, including as the U.N.-Arab League’s special envoy to Syria in 2012. He remained a powerful advocate for global causes through his eponymous foundation.

Annan took on the top U.N. post six years after the collapse of the Soviet Union and presided during a decade when the world united against terrorism after the Sept. 11 attacks – then divided deeply over the U.S.-led war against Iraq. The U.S. relationship tested him as a world diplomatic leader.

“I think that my darkest moment was the Iraq war, and the fact that we could not stop it,” Annan said in a February 2013 interview with TIME magazine to mark the publication of his memoir, “Interventions: A Life in War and Peace.”

“I worked very hard – I was working the phone, talking to leaders around the world. The U.S. did not have the support in the Security Council,” Annan recalled in the videotaped interview posted on The Kofi Annan Foundation’s website.

“So they decided to go without the council. But I think the council was right in not sanctioning the war,” he said. “Could you imagine if the U.N. had endorsed the war in Iraq, what our reputation would be like? Although at that point, President (George W.) Bush said the U.N. was headed toward irrelevance, because we had not supported the war. But now we know better.”

Despite his well-honed diplomatic skills, Annan was never afraid to speak candidly. That didn’t always win him fans, particularly in the case of Bush’s administration, with whom Annan’s camp spent much time bickering. Much of his second term was spent at odds with the United States, the U.N.’s biggest contributor, as he tried to lean on the nation to pay almost $2 billion in arrears.

Kofi Atta Annan was born April 8, 1938, into an elite family in Kumasi, Ghana, the son of a provincial governor and grandson of two tribal chiefs.

He shared his middle name Atta – “twin” in Ghana’s Akan language – with a twin sister, Efua. He became fluent in English, French and several African languages, attending an elite boarding school and the University of Science and Technology in Kumasi. He finished his undergraduate work in economics at Macalester College in St. Paul, Minnesota, in 1961. From there he went to Geneva, where he began his graduate studies in international affairs and launched his U.N. career.

Annan married Titi Alakija, a Nigerian woman, in 1965, and they had a daughter, Ama, and a son, Kojo. He returned to the U.S. in 1971 and earned a master’s degree at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Sloan School of Management. The couple separated during the 1970s and, while working in Geneva, Annan met his second wife, Swedish lawyer Nane Lagergren. They married in 1984.

Annan worked for the U.N. Economic Commission for Africa in Ethiopia, its Emergency Force in Egypt, and the office of the High Commissioner for Refugees in Geneva, before taking a series of senior posts at U.N. headquarters in New York dealing with human resources, budget, finance, and staff security.

He also had special assignments. After Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, he facilitated the repatriation from Iraq of more than 900 international staff and other non-Iraqi nationals, and the release of western hostages in Iraq. He led the initial negotiations with Iraq for the sale of oil in exchange for humanitarian relief.

Just before becoming secretary-general, Annan served as U.N. peacekeeping chief and as special envoy to the former Yugoslavia, where he oversaw a transition in Bosnia from U.N. protective forces to NATO-led troops.

The U.N. peacekeeping operation faced two of its greatest failures during his tenure: the Rwanda genocide in 1994, and the massacre in the Bosnian town of Srebrenica in July 1995.

In both cases, the U.N. had deployed troops under Annan’s command, but they failed to save the lives of the civilians they were mandated to protect. Annan offered apologies, but ignored calls to resign by U.S. Republican lawmakers. After became secretary-general, he called for U.N. reports on those two debacles – and they were highly critical of his management.

As secretary-general, Annan forged his experiences into a doctrine called the “Responsibility to Protect,” that countries accepted – at least in principle – to head off genocide, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing and war crimes.

Annan sought to strengthen the U.N.’s management, coherence and accountability, efforts that required huge investments in training and technology, a new whistleblower policy and financial disclosure requirements.

In 1998, he helped ease a transition to civilian rule in Nigeria and visited Iraq to try to resolve its impasse with the Security Council over compliance with weapons inspections and other matters. The effort helped avoid an outbreak of hostilities that seemed imminent at the time.

In 1999, he was deeply involved in the process by which East Timor gained independence from Indonesia, and started the “Global Compact” initiative that has grown into the world’s largest effort to promote corporate social responsibility.

Annan was chief architect of what became known as the Millennium Development Goals, and played a central role in creating the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria and the U.N.’s first counter-terrorism strategy.

Annan’s uncontested election to a second term was unprecedented, reflecting the overwhelming support he enjoyed from both rich and poor countries. Timothy Wirth, president of the United Nations Foundation, which disburses Ted Turner’s $1 billion pledge to U.N. causes, hailed “a saint-like sense about him.”

In 2005, Annan succeeded in establishing the Peacebuilding Commission and the Human Rights Council. But that year, the U.N. was facing almost daily attacks over allegations about corruption in the U.N. oil-for-food program in Iraq, bribery by U.N. purchasing officials and widespread sex abuse by U.N. peacekeepers – an issue that would only balloon in importance after he left office.

It emerged that Annan’s son, Kojo, had not disclosed payments he received from his employer, which had a $10 million-a-year contract to monitor humanitarian aid under the oil-for-food program. The company paid at least $300,000 to Kojo so he would not work for competitors after he left.

An independent report criticized the secretary-general for being too complacent, saying he should have done more to investigate matters even if he was not involved with the awarding of the contract.

World leaders agreed to create an internal U.N. ethics office, but a major overhaul of the U.N.’s outdated management practices and operating procedures was left to Annan’s successor, Ban Ki-moon.

Before leaving office, Annan helped secure a truce between Israel and Hezbollah in 2006, and mediated a settlement of a dispute between Cameroon and Nigeria over the Bakassi peninsula.

At a farewell news conference, Annan listed as top achievements the promotion of human rights, the fighting to close the gap between extreme poverty and immense wealth, and the U.N. campaign to fight infectious diseases like AIDS.

He never took disappointments and setbacks personally. And he kept his view that diplomacy should take place in private and not in the public forum.

In his memoir, Annan recognized the costs of taking on the world’s top diplomatic job, joking that “SG,” for secretary-general, also signified “scapegoat” around U.N. headquarters.

Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Richard Holbrooke called Annan “an international rock star of diplomacy.”

After leaving his high-profile U.N. perch, Annan didn’t let up. In 2007, his Geneva-based foundation was created. That year he helped broker peace in Kenya, where election violence had killed over 1,000 people.

He also joined The Elders, an elite group of former leaders founded by Nelson Mandela, eventually succeeding Desmond Tutu as its chairman after a failed interlude trying to resolve Syria’s rising civil war.

As special envoy to Syria in 2012, Annan won international backing for a six-point plan for peace. The U.N. deployed a 300-member observer force to monitor a cease-fire, but peace never took hold and Annan was unable to surmount the bitter stalemate among Security Council powers. He resigned in frustration seven months into the job, as the civil war raged on.

Annan continued to crisscross the globe. In 2017, his foundation’s biggest projects included promotion of fair, peaceful elections; work with Myanmar’s government to improve life in troubled Rakhine state; and battling violent extremism by enlisting young people to help.

He also remained a vocal commentator on troubles like the refugee crisis; promoted good governance, anti-corruption measures and sustainable agriculture in Africa; and pushed efforts in the fight against illegal drug trafficking.

Annan retained connections to many international organizations. He was chancellor of the University of Ghana, a fellow at New York’s Columbia University, and professor at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy in Singapore.

Annan is survived by his wife and three children. Funeral arrangements weren’t immediately announced.

___

Former Associated Press writer John Heilprin contributed.

Who are the strongest countries in Asia? Young Diplomats reveals the top 10

10/ Vietnam

The Socialist Republic of Vietnam has a solid military reputation. The country is one of the most stable and developed countries in South East Asia. Vietnamese soldiers fought and won against four different superiors opponents: The Chineses, The Mongols, The French and the Americans. Despite low technological advancements, their army remains one of the most powerful and organized one in South East Asia.

9/ Indonesia

Indonesian Army is composed of a strong navy and more than 400,000 soldiers. The country is one of the most populous in the World. Indonesian army has proven many times its “efficiency” by quelling internal dissent, notably in the island of Aceh. This army is determined, however lacking the know-how and the technological advance of some of its neighbors. The fact that they do not recognize Israel also impeach them to receive Israeli Technology, particularly popular among low-income countries.

8/ Taiwan 

Taiwan, also known as the “Republic of China” has a relatively small military in number, however, the quality of its effect is impressive. Taiwan possesses a strong technological know-how, acquired thanks to its cooperation with countries like Singapore, Israel or South Korea. Taiwan’s military balance is, however, declining, as China is making efforts to modernize its army. Taiwan also benefits from the US military protection, which permits them to rank at the 8th place.

7/ Japan

Japan has an impressive war-tradition culture. However, since WWII, the Japanese military has been restricted to solely defense purpose and the country developed itself only economically. Still, during the last decades, Japanese military forces have been restructured and have turned into a solid military entity. A combination of very advanced technology to a highly disciplined hierarchy permits Japan to ranks 7th despite their lacks of experience in operational theaters.

6/ South Korea

South Korea has been at war in the recent years with its northern neighbor. Because they have to live – like Israel- with constant threats , they have developed a very strong military with high operational abilities. South Korea is also supported by the US. These factors combined to the fact that South Korea is a technological country permits its army to manage with confidence the South Korean threat. The North Korean army being in a terrible shape, the only thing that could worry South Korea is the nuclearization of its Northern neighbor. South Korea.

5/ Pakistan

Pakistan is a regional power. Pakistan is ranked here because of their high number of active military personel and the influence of the army in the politics in Pakistan. Indeed the army is an important political player in the Pakistani Democracy. The army has developped over the last decade an economic empire within the country, permitting it to be a self-sustainable entity.

Pakistani officers have war experience , as they experienced many short wars with their Indian neighbors. They also have experience with dealing with Islamic insurgency as they had to fight the Taliban, and more recently the Islamic state in the Eastern Parts of the country. The army and the intelligence agencies of the country have proven effective in limiting Islamic infiltration from Afghanistan. Nonetheless, the country is also under international scrutiny as the US accused them to support the Taliban and other terror organizations, a claim that Islamabad strongly denied. With the recent elections and the Hawkish Trump Administration, Pakistani armed forces will likely become significantly weaker in the years to come.

4/ Israel

Israel is a country constantly under threat since its creation. The Israeli Defense Apparatus has proven very creative when it comes to defense. The country is without a doubt, one of the most advanced in the world in terms of Defense technologies, Its latest inventions -David’s Sling and Iron Dome- systems that can intercept incoming mortars and missiles makes Israeli Defense Industries among the most innovative in the world.

The Israeli Army also waged a war in 2014 with the terror organization Hamas. In 2006, Israel went also on a full-scale war against Lebanon and the Hezbollah. Israel is constantly preparing for a new round of hostilities with its neighbors. The fact that Israel recently acquired Americans F-35 gave them a considerable advantage other their hostile neighbors. Israel also managed to destroy a high amount of Iranian assets in Syria.

3/India

With China, India seems to be one of the fastest rising power in Asia. India has more than 1.2 millions active military personnel. Indian Military has constantly been on alert since decades as they have to face both conventional and unconventional opponents, mostly led by its Pakistani rival.

India performed significantly better during the war of 1965 and 1971 against Pakistan. India Military Defense industry is also developing very quickly with the production of Indian made Tanks and weapons. India has also recently acquired fighter jet from France and Russia and purchased a Russian aircraft carrier.

2/Russia

Even if Russia can not totally be considered an Asian country, we wanted to include it . If Russian Military is not as high as India or China (800,000), the level of weapons technology acquired during the Soviet Union period is highly impressive.

Russia managed to produce during the last decades of highly advanced weapons systems such as the Kornet or the AK-47, used all over the world today. Even China, the no.1 of this topic is buying Russian equipment. In addition, the Spetsnaz, Russian special forces are the best special forces in the world, as they recently proved in the Syrian Battlefield.

1/China

The People’s Liberation Army Ground Force is the largest army in the world with almost 2 millions military personnel. Chinese Army was weaker in the past decades because of corruption, but recently with strong and deep reforms, the Chinese military is slowly but surely becoming more effective.

Chinese lack of qualitative equipment is backed up with quantity. China massive army can virtually defeat any opponents on the planet. Even if China currently lacks the ability to invade through land or sea countries such as Taiwan, their superiority on land remain unmatched.

Russia is one more time targeted by some new economic sanctions from the United States. This decision has been made because of the Case Skripal where Russia has been  accused of having used some forbidden chemical weapons, but also because of the interference case during the American electorate in 2016. 

Even if the President of the United States has been showing some friendly and closer relations with the Russian leader Vladimir Putin during the meeting in Helsinki (Finland) , the behavior of the American President has been mostly criticised because of being considered as « Pro Putin » by the Trump Administration. All of this, comes from the fact that Russia is involved in the Interference Affair during the Presidential Election campaign in the USA. The Trump Administration has let known this, and the decision concerning the new sanctions has been taken but not only for these reasons. This decision has been announced after having considered that Moscow has not respected international laws. 

According to the Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination Act of 1991, it calls for sanctions to Russia. The country lead by Vladimir Putin has 90 days to prove if yes or not, chemical and biological weapons have been used in the Skripal Case and if it’s still present in the Russian territory. These decisions have many impacts. First of all it would have many economical impact for Russia. In fact, the sanctions are about some items which may have military uses exported from the US to Russia, but also about some technological products. Another aspect, is about the right for a Russian Airway company to land in America during the period that sanctions are applied. Moreover, since the announcement of these new sanctions , the Russian Stock Market has been decreasing as investments in the country. The other impact is on diplomatic relations between both countries. Actually, the President, Donald Trump would like to have some stability and peaceful relations with the Russian Leader even when we know that this relation seems complicated. One the one hand , in March, Trump ordered to expel 60 of Russian diplomats from US territory, and this is not the first time that the US sanctions Russia. 

In reaction, the Permanent Representative of Russia to the United Nations, Dimitri Polyanskiy has twitted : « The theater of absurd continues. No proofs, no clues, no logic, no presumption of innocence, just highly-liklies. Only one rule: blame everything on Russia, no matter how absurd and fake it is. Let us welcome the United Sanctions of America! ». Moreover, Russia declares that it has nothing to do with this poisoning happened in the United Kingdom, but also that retaliations are coming to respond to the US.

Russia is not the only country to have reacted about. In Europe Italy has letting known that the relation between Russia and the United States is one of the most important in the Word and the Italian Prime minister Sir Conte calls to establish dialogue between these two global powers. It looks also as an opportunity to get dialogue between the Western World and Russia. This also looks like the general European point of view of knowing this decision. As we know, the European Union is trying to fix the relations whereas London does agree with the decisions, Italy such as Brussels and Paris show some disagreement about it. 

Now, we wonder which changes would relations between Russia and the rest of the world take, and which kind of diplomatic impacts those disagreement and decision would have between Europe, America and Russia. 

The video dates back to February but has resurfaced in August. Paola Taverna is campaigning in Santarcangelo di Romagna for the Five Star Movement, which a month later would gain 32.7% of the Italian vote in the general election. With the audience’s support, she declares: “Anti-vaxxers are a minority you can easily live with, as others are vaccinated. (…) A child who’s not vaccinated is healthy! They should be carrier of what sort of disease? When I was a child and one of my cousins had some rash illness, we would queue up at his house, so our aunt would have all seven nephews and nieces fall sick and get the pox to f— off!”

Taverna, now Vice-president of the Italian Senate, is not alone. The coalition government has been involved in a crusade against vaccines, with potentially catastrophic consequences. Davide Barillari, a 5SM spokesperson for Social Policy in the Lazio Regional Council, wrote a post accusing immunologists of conspiring with pharmaceutical lobbies and the opposition to discredit the Movement. His phrase “Politics comes before science” resonates with previous statements from League’s leader and Home Secretary Matteo Salvini, who suggested that “corporations or drug companies have picked Italy as a test case” as most EU States do not have compulsory vaccinations.

In such a disillusioned scenario, it is not encouraging that Health Minister Giulia Grillo has temporarily replaced official NHS documentation with self-certifications, so that children can access kinder-gardens until 2019 with less “bureaucratic workload”: she has shown a dislike for the previous law despite supporting vaccinations, giving no indications on what the next legislative move will be to protect the population.
The decision destroys the path on which Italy was moving for better prevention. In 2017 the then Minister Beatrice Lorenzin signed a decree to tackle a worrying rise in the number of measles cases and meningitis outbreaks in Tuscany. Until that moment only injections against polio, diphtheria, tetanus and hepatitis B were compulsory: shots for MMR, meningitis B and C, pertussis, Hib, and chickenpox were made mandatory.

The inclusion was also justified by a coverage below the 95% target set by the World Health Organisation, which guarantees herd immunity for those not vaccinated due to an immunodeficiency or age limit. Migration from African countries where such diseases are endemic has worsened the issues caused by anti-vax tendencies.
Although its health system was recognised as the second best in the world in 2000, in the last decade Italy has shown an inconsistent approach to vaccinations. Differences in coverage rates suggest that the problem originates from the educational divide between affluent and depressed areas: this prevents citizens from autonomously researching the positive impact of immunisation, unless there are NHS campaigns in place.

This issue is accompanied by varying degrees of decentralisation for autonomous regions such as Friuli-Venezia-Giulia and Sicily, and the lack of a nationwide IT system from which to access vaccination records. The Democratic Party may have failed to address these issues, but the general discontent with scientific premises across the populist spectrum exacerbates the institutional stalemate.
Even those who support vaccinations like 5SM leader Luigi Di Maio have shown flexibility on how to preserve the threshold, citing access to education as a reason for delaying an otherwise necessary requirement. Nonetheless, there has been no mention of fines against rule-breakers. The rejection of opinions like Taverna and Barillari’s has not spread throughout the party and leaves Italy vulnerable to scepticism, in the light of growing health risks and inaccurate information spiralling out of control.

Death penalty may be considered in the case of fatal accident on the road if the investigation proves that the death was deliberately caused. This is what the government proposes to respond to the many student’s demonstrations in the capital of Dhaka. This protest movement, which doesn’t weaken, follows the death of two young people hit by a bus which was driving too fast.

Violent repression against the people

 Since july 28 many people has been wounded because of the hard repression of the government against demonstrators. Indeed, it used tear gas and shoots against students with rubber bullets, which wounded hundreds of people. Armed men also act in the name of the government, as counter-demonstrator, and attacked photographers, journalists and students. Shahidul Alam, a Bangladeshi human rights activist and photographer, says, “Youth groups affiliated with the ruling party Awami League have joined the police to beat up journalists and protesters”. The latter has since been arrested by the police at his home. The Human Rights Organization Amnesty international asked for the government to stop its violent repression against its people. Since august 5th, internet has been cut in order to prevent the movement from gaining extend.

The claims of the demonstrators are for instance the construction of pedestrian crossing over the major axes, the simple respect of the traffic rules, but also more control over the bus companies circulating in the city. Protesters also want to continue demonstrations until the transport minister decides to resign.

A general despondency of Bangladeshi society

 Actually, all of this is not just about country’s road safety. The demonstrations are the result of a general despondency of Bangladeshi society. The death of two young people hit by a bus is certainly tragic, however it is not a rare fact.

Through this pretext of these road safety problems, it’s an entire system which is pointed out. The Bangladeshi government is often criticized by the population for widespread corruption. The public transport area is therefore a good representation because even traffic officers are corrupted. Corruption has been a continuing problem in Bangladesh. In 2004 an anti-corruption commission has been created, but it is largely ineffective because of the governmental control over it.

Ali Al Maruf gives many examples of corruption’s scandal since 2009. The first one is the Padma Bridge: a project of USD 2.915 billion, initially supported by the World Bank, Asian Development Bank, Islamic Development Bank and Japan International Cooperation Agency. Nevertheless, after only three months, donors have refused to take risks because of the corruption of the government. World Bank has declared that it has proof of a « corruption conspiracy ». This one was just an example among many others.

These many repetitive scandals weaken the society and avoid the development of infrastructures in Bangladesh. It is therefore the reign of insalubrity, insecurity and lack of investment. Road insecurity is therefore a pretext to raise the anger of society. The government is missing something when it proposes the death penalty in the event of a fatal road accident, and only a few months of important elections.

The Syrian war will remain in history as the bloodiest and longest conflict of the beginning of the 21st century. But do you really know this conflict ? Here’s our first quiz on this crisis ! YoungDiplomats will publish plenty of quizzes on crisis, wars, personalities and geopolitics ! Good luck with this first quiz !

The scope of this program is to promote young professionals who have a track record of commitment to the field of international affairs, who demonstrate high potential and have been involved in a variety of activities at local, regional and global level. We are continuing our series with Tony from Peru.

• Tony, thank you for giving us this interview, let’s start with you telling us more about your background?

I have a B.A. (Hons) in Political Science at the Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos (Peru) as well as an Erasmus Mundus Master in Public Policy, given by the Institute of Social Studies, Erasmus Rotterdam University and the University of York. My colleagues and I founded the Institute of Andean Political Studies with the aim of filling an existing void in the academic production of Social Sciences at my country. I can say our work have given good results, since our institute has more than nine years of existence. We release two issues of the Andean Journal of Political Studies (Revista Andina de Estudios Políticos-RAEP) per year, which is actually the main reference (in academic production terms) generated from Peru for the Latin American region. On the other hand, I am also involved in activities with the International Association of Political Science Students (IAPSS), for which I work as a Deputy Editor-In-Chief of Encuentro Latinoamericano: Journal of Latin American Studies; as well as Co-Coordinator of the Latin American Outreach Program. In the city where I live now, I work as a professor of Political Science and International Relations at the Universidad Católica de Santa María-UCSM.

• What projects are you involved in currently?

Since returning to Peru, I have focused on political and institutional development projects for local governments in the south of the country. I am working closely with District Municipalities for the implementation of the Civil Service Law, which has been proposed by the National Civil Service Authority (SERVIR) as a mandatory compliance standard for all public entities. The purpose of SERVIR is the professionalization of our civil servants, and the creation of an unified public career for the Peruvian State, from the bottom to the top.

Two years ago the first School of Political Science and Government of Southern Peru has just opened at the Universidad Católica de Santa María-UCSM (Region of Arequipa). I joined UCSM few months ago, and from them I got involved with many of our current research projects, reform of the academic courses, syllabi and career licensing. I have generated four research groups with students who are preparing articles and papers on topics as varied as the relations between China and Latin America, the History of Political Science in the region, the border dynamics between Peru and Bolivia, as well as the causes of social conflicts with extractive industries. We have just formed a permanent team to participate in United Nations Models inside and outside the country; as well as a chapter on Peru for an encyclopedia that will be published by an University located in the United States.

• In your opinion, what are the challenges South America is facing today? How about the challenges faced in Peru?

In my opinion, we South Americans face some challenges that I would call ‘traditional’, as well as others typical of this time.

Our traditional challenges are linked to the geoeconomic position of the region as a producer of raw materials and a buyer of manufactured products. Although the situation is the same for all countries in the region, there are some nuances: While countries such as Brazil and Argentina have managed to consolidate a small, but very efficient industrial complex within the MERCOSUR space, countries such as Venezuela depend exclusively on oil exports, so they have to import almost all of the products they consume. In this sense, the economic presence of China is also an important challenge for us, since that country has promoted a ‘re-primarization’ of the continent’s economic structure. In Peru, many trade unions and leftist groups radically opposed the signing of the FTA with China. Although the FTA facilitated a greater investment on our mining sector, it seriously damaged our textile and manufacturing sectors. Even if manufacturing and the informal sector is bigger in employment terms, our extractive industries are more relevant for the Peruvian economy in GDP terms; so the government finally decided to sign the agreement.

In other hand, our new challenges are more related to the model of democracy, as well as the insertion of the region in a world where new protectionist and authoritarian tendencies appear. None of the governments of the region, no matter if they have open economies (Peru, Colombia, Chile) or those of the so-called ’21st century socialism’ (Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador), could fulfill their promise to reduce their enormous and deep-rooted corruption levels. Despite their different rhetoric and discourses, their asymmetric relations among States and Corporations really didn’t make a big difference while dealing with corruption. This problem was clearly reflected by the multi-millionaire scandal that linked the Brazilian company Odebrecht, which, for decades, has been paying bribes to high public officials to win construction bids around all the continent. Although our poor peoples have achieved certain social gains on health, education and welfare (mostly thanks to the favorable prices of raw materials during the past decade), the excessive corruption of the South American governments consolidated clientelistic structures and authoritarian models that remain sensitive to external shocks. In this sense, we can say that all the governments have acted in a more or less similar way, without major distinctions between their domestic ideologies (only Uruguay and Chile could be considered as partial exceptions of this rule).

Due to this situation, the role of Brazil as a rising power and promoter of a new multipolar order (within the framework of ‘emerging blocs’ such as the BRICS or organizations such as the Union of South American Nations-UNASUR) has vanished for now. The Odebrecht scandal and the Venezuelan crisis have been the two main causes of the terrible loss of geopolitical relevance in today’s South America.

• What are the most important qualities for young people to be successful in the international relations field?

We know well that international affairs require people prepared in international politics and economics, as well as foreign languages ​​and cultures. From my opinion, the background required to operate in the international arena is well covered by the current academic offerings in the universities, mainly in the United States and Europe. Outside of mere knowledge aspects, I believe that emotional issues, critical thinking and attitudinal factors are very important to have a successful career on international affairs. A permanent openness of mind and ability to permanently question one’s own ideas, discourses and prejudices is indispensable. Despite the fact that more than 25 years have passed since the end of the Cold War, we continue to think in traditional terms to understand such complex issues as the concepts of ‘allies’ and ‘enemies’, the contingent nature of the integration models and the deep causes of wars. If we want to contribute to solve some of today’s world’s problems, we need more reflection on the way how do we conceptualize those problems.

• How do you empower young people to get involved in youth activities/conferences in Peru/South America/globally etc.?

Within IAPSS we aim to ‘regionalize’ the academic debate, strengthening its bonds between its headquarters, located in Europe, with students from all Latin America. I believe that our region has much to contribute, from a theoretical and epistemological point of view, to the contemporary debate in Political Science and International Relations; due to the particular characteristics of our development model, as well as the challenges we face now. I also consider that Spanish language is still scarcely represented in important academic publications, such as books from international University presses and prestigious indexed journals; which contradicts the enormous academic production that has been taking place for decades in Latin America. I believe that we have here a big opportunity to promote Spanish as one of the ‘official’ languages on academic debates, organizations, think-tanks and associations.

This is the same vision that we have in Peru within the Institute of Andean Political Studies; which aims to be an academic center capable bring together young scholars from the region with the aim of generating a Latin American network of young researchers on topics related mainly to Political Science and International Relations, but also the rest of the Social Sciences. Around all Latin America we have a large ‘spaghetti bowl’ emerging from scientific associations, research groups, institutes and think tanks; so our most urgent challenge is to increase dialogue and mutual exchange among institutions, to collaborate on shared publications and projects, as well as the creation of new competitive funds for research with support from State institutions, private companies and civil society groups. Our region has all the capabilities, as well as the right to have a stronger voice in the global affairs debate.

• What advice would you give to young people who embark on study/career path in this field?

My best advice for young students and scholars is not new: Think about international affairs outside your traditional spaces, that is, the Diplomatic Academies, the Armed Forces Institutes, or the Ministries of Foreign Affairs. Especially in regions outside capital cities, there is a growing demand for professionals of international studies, which comes mainly from regional and local governments, multinational companies or NGOs. Typical social science skills such as the management of qualitative and quantitative methods, risk analysis and fundraising are increasingly required by the various social and political actors operating in local areas that had been typically managed by lawyers, administrators and engineers. Plus, a global vision of policy, international affairs professionals have a large advantage to deal with most of development issues in our countries. From the Institute of Andean Political Studies and the Universidad Católica de Santa María, we are just starting a new research about relations between China and Peru, since our country is very sensitive to the dynamics of production and consumption of that country. We want to share our results with local stakeholders from Arequipa and the rest of Peruvian South, in order to have a realist discussion about the medium and long-term impact of Chinese trade and investment on our economy and politics.

• How important is having a mentor?

In the early stages of learning, it is indispensable. First, a mentor must teach his students what are the proper techniques for research, search and verification of sources; as well as develop a certain discipline and work habits with their students. From there, the mentor plays a more relaxed role, in which he becomes a reviewer and a source of consultation when students need help. Considering that many young people start the university with many doubts about their vocation and future after graduating, a good mentor is one who manages to get their students to develop critical thinking and independence in the shortest possible time. After that, the mentor-student relationship disappears and becomes that of two colleagues who dialogue horizontally in the construction of knowledge and the solution of problems.

• Do you have a model or an inspiration?

Yes, I had a very good professor of international affairs during my undergraduate time at the Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos in Lima. Unfortunately, he passed out years ago. My reflections on mentoring and teaching come from him.

• Tell us about the main challenges that you had to overcome in this field until now?

I would like to talk about my recent experience, since from some months ago I no longer live in the capital of the country. Now I live in Arequipa, a southern city that is the second most important in the country. Although international studies in Lima already have some time of existence and prestige within the academic community, this is not the case in the rest of the country. International studies continue to be seen as ‘general culture’ knowledge and not relevant in front of the daily issues of the city, which are understood as mere domestic problems. I think this is a serious mistake, but very common in small and middle-power countries like Peru, where almost all the international and global affairs are only discussed among few scholars from Lima, outside the diplomatic body and the Ministry of Foreign Relations, also located in Lima. Arequipa is one of the Peruvian regions that depends most on foreign direct investment on mining (mainly gold and copper), while the mining company Cerro Verde (controlled by American and Dutch companies) is one of the most powerful in the country. If we add to this the fact that China is the main destination of our mining exports; topics such as Brexit, the domestic impact of the Peru-European Union FTA, and the trade war between the United States and China are topics of great interest to the Arequipa people, since these factors directly affect the incomes that regional and local governments, as well as the regional public University, obtain from mining royalties. Performance of our subnational organizations depends directly on factors such as these, which, although less visible, are decisive. Because of this, international studies scholars and professionals have a great responsibility into spreading and promoting these ideas, either from Universities, the media and civil society organizations.

World today is believed to be moving from unipolarity to multipolarity. Perhaps with the rise of China, it has already taken the course. Rauch and Wurm (2013) argue that following the thoughts of unipolarity debate, the world is going to be unipolar, with the United States of America upholding, or even magnifying, its hegemonic position in the world order. While on contrary to this debate, due to the emergence of certain economic powers, a new discourse of power transition in the international order has surfaced, which talks about power transition from unipolarity to multipolarity.

According to the power realist paradigm of International Relations (IR), a state which exceeds in military strength, size of territory and population, competence and political stability, economic capacity and resource endowment, is a great power (Walt 2010, cited by Varisco, 2013). Varisco (2013) in this regard argues that a great power is assured by these characteristics to exert its political, economic, social and military power to create its influence on the global scale. The number of great powers and polarity (i-e unipolar, bipolar and multipolar) as its aftermath in the international system are determined by the power capabilities distribution.

China’s continuous economic growth has made it a great power. Increase in annual GDP growth rate, military expansion, and international trade and investments, are the factors which make China a great power. Having influence in world power politics and world order policies, what are the strategies and policies adopted by China to play its role in the world order as a great power?

In order to answer the above question, in the following paragraphs, this article aims to describe and explain the power political strategies of China. Economic, military and political strategies of China will be described, explained and discussed. Based on the preceding arguments, discussions and analyses, conclusion(s) will be drawn.

Political Power Strategies of China

Economic Strategies of China:

Economic capacity of a country is one of the characteristics of being a great power in the world. Currently, China’s economic capacity has made it evident that economically it is a great power. Morrison (2015) in this regard argues that before the commencement of liberalization of trade and economic reforms, economic policies maintained by China kept its economy not only stagnant, inefficient, poor and centrally-controlled but also isolated from other economies of the world. However, after the implementation of free-market reforms in order to open up the foreign investment and trade in 1979, China, with the annual GDP growth rate of nearly 9.66%  from 1989-2017 according to Trading Economics Website, has been among the fastest growing economies of the world. It has emerged as an economic power in the recent decades. In addition to this, it is not only the largest economy of the world in terms of purchasing power parity but also the largest merchandise trader, holder of foreign exchange reserves, and manufacturer (Morrison, 2015).  Furthermore, in 2016, China’s economy surpassed that of the U.S. in terms of GDP measured in purchasing power parity. Armijo & Roberts predicted it in their essay, “The Emerging Powers and Global Governance: Why the BRICS Matter,” in the year 2014 that by 2016 the economy of China would surpass that of the U.S. in terms of GDP measured in purchasing power parity. They added that China’s economy would also surpass that of the US in dollar-terms in next 10 years.

In order to prove its economic power in the world, China has started investing in other countries of Sub Saharan Africa and South Asia which is its major inroads to exert economic and political influence in these countries.  According to a report by Mayer Brown (2014) written for “The Economist’s Intelligence Unit”, in the countries of Africa, China’s desire is predominant for foreign assets. One of the key findings of the report is that the largest investment destination for China is Africa. Besides this, China’s recent investment in Pakistan under China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) project is another evidence of power political strategy of China. According to “The Washington Post” report, China is investing billions of dollars in Pakistan to create an economic corridor between respective countries. Dawn News reports that initially, China planned to invest 46 billion USD with additional projects; the current worth of CPEC is 62 billion USD. “CPEC is part of China’s grand vision, known as the One Belt, One Road (OBOR) initiative. This vision extends from the Baltics in Europe to Southeast Asia and from China to Africa,” Dawn News reports.

In addition to this, according to a commentary by Angela Stanzel (2014) published in “European Council for Foreign Affairs”, after the reduction of engagement of the US and NATO forces from the war-torn land of Afghanistan, China has stepped in. There are numerous reasons behind Afghanistan being an attractive destination for Chinese investment. Because of its Central and South Asian location, the country holds importance for China. Furthermore, the natural resources of Afghanistan have also made China interested to step in the oft-argued great game.  Furthermore, according to Reuters (January 2018) news report, in order to deepen its political and economic cooperation in the region, China invited Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) member countries to be part of Chinese OBOR adding another region to the initiative.

Military Strategies of China:

According to an article published in Los Angeles Times on September 02, 2015 by Julie Makinen that with 2.3 million on the ground, air and naval serving troops, People’s Liberation Army (PLA) of China is one of the largest military forces in the world.  Furthermore, she argues that even though the military of China is not going to surpass the US military anytime soon, the gap between the two armies is certainly getting closer.  A major factor behind this increasing military force is China’s increasing defense budget (Makinen, 2015).  An article published in CNBC website (2015) basis its arguments on a report and argues that China is going to double its defense spending by 2020. By the end of this current decade, it is forecasted that China’s annual defense budget is going to be $260 billion which was $134 billion in 2010. This increase in China’s military power worries the world in general and the U.S. in particular. Thus, Department of Defense, USA published a study report based on “Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2015”. The report highlighted that in order to fight high-intensity short-duration regional conflicts; a comprehensive military modernization program is designed by China to improve its armed forces. Furthermore, it also highlighted that the primary driving force for China’s investment in the military is to prepare itself for a potential conflict with Taiwan. Other than the possibilities of Taiwan, China also increased its prominence on the preparation for the possibilities in South and the East China Sea. In the addition to this, the report emphasized that the international interests and global footprints of China are growing. The report added to this and said that the modernization program of China’s military is focusing more towards the investment for a missions’ range beyond its own borders which includes sea lane security, peacekeeping, disaster relief, humanitarian assistance, counter-piracy and power projection. The main highlight of the report was that in order to deny the challenges of benefits of modern warfare based on information, China has started centring its attention towards offensive cyber operations, electronic warfare capabilities and counter-space. Additionally to this, in order to build infrastructure and use it as bases for civil and military operations to augment its existence in areas which are significantly disputed, China has started to reclaim the land in its outpost Islands. Therefore, it can be said that China’s military strategy is to prove its power political strategy.

Bonnie S. Glaser and Mathew P. Punaiole from Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) while commenting on “Xi Jinping’s 19^th Party Congress Speech” argued that Xi suggested People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to be prepared to employ military power. Moreover, “underscoring that “a military is built to fight,” Xi called on the PLA to “regard combat capability as the criterion to meet in all its work” and to focus on “winning wars” if called upon to fight,” they added. During his speech, Xi also declared that by 2035 modernization of China’s national defense and forces will be completed. By 2049 (100^th year of the founding of People’s Republic of China), Xi expects the full transformation of PLA into a first-tier force. Glaser and Mathew (2017) do not consider such ambitions of Xi unusual and comment, “rising powers often seek to reinforce their expanding security needs with military might.” However, they suspect such developments of China as its desire to displace the dominant power of the U.S. in Asia.

Political Strategies of China:

John J. Mearsheimer (2010), a realist, is pessimistic about the peaceful rise of China. He argues that in order to contain its power, most of the neighbouring countries of China including Japan, India, Vietnam, South Korea, Singapore and even Russia will join the United States. This is because of the fact that the power shift from the U.S. to China may not be good for the peace in the neighbouring countries. China seems to be inspired by this view and trying to contain its neighbours by showing them a friendlier face. Thus, China tried to make its political situation better. On November 07, 2015 The Economist in this regard published an article with the title, “Reef Nuts. No more Mr Nasty Guy? China tries to be nice,” in which “China has been showing a friendlier face” was highlighted. The article talked about China’s recent regional political development and said that China was not only showing a friendlier face to Taiwan but also to Vietnam and Japan.  This friendly dealing of China with its neighbouring countries was termed as high-level diplomacy which accordingly calmed some of the quarrels of China in Asia (The Economist, 2015). This behavior of China contradicted with Mearsheimer’s argument at least for some time. However, China’s political strategies have changed to a certain extent since then. China has returned to the one man rule which has already been discussed in an article entitled, “Return of One Man Rule in China,” published on April 05, 2018.

Conclusion

“China won’t seek hegemony and will continue to play its part as a major and responsible country,” said Xi during his speech on the occasion of 19^th Party Congress. China is considered reluctant to seek hegemony explicitly. However, from China’s power-political strategies, mentioned above, it seems other way around. Glaser and Mathew (2017) argued the same in their analysis of Xi’s speech. So far China’s strategies are geo-economics centric and non-military intervention oriented. China also maintains friendly behaviour towards its neighbouring countries to a certain extent. China wants to maintain its sovereignty and does not allow external forces to influence its internal matter and foreign policy. China, without any doubt, poses a great challenge to the U.S. hegemony not only in Asia but also in other parts of the world. Hence, China is the main player in the changing world order from unipolarity to multipolarity.

Muhammad Murad has been writing for different magazines and blogs since 2011. He initially started writing on social issues of Pakistan and later on, he began writing on internal and external issues related to Pakistan. Currently, he is Young Diplomats’ ambassador in Pakistan. He believes in a peaceful liberal democratic world away from war and conflict which would be possible by the power of the pen, not the gun. Muhammad is a business graduate turned  social scientist and aspires to be a writer.

Gender inequality and women’s rights are far from a struggle of the past. Instead, these disparities permeate every aspect of today’s world, especially regarding armed conflict. Women are disproportionately affected by sexual violence during wartime and bear the largest burden from armed conflict. Why, then, has the international community allowed women’s voices to be silenced in United Nations peace processes by denying them an equal number of seats at negotiating tables or spots in peacekeeping squads?

This human rights paradox of mismatched impacts on and involvement by women in peace and security issues is most conspicuously illuminated by the international community in U.N. Security Council Resolution 1325. This landmark resolution was the first by any global governmental organization to acknowledge wartime risks to women and the correlation between gender equality and conflict resolution. However, since its founding in 2000, it has failed in its goal to significantly improve women’s representation in peacebuilding efforts. Given the demonstrated effectiveness of women peacekeepers in protecting women’s rights and shaping more gender-equitable solutions to conflicts, the United Nations and its member states must make good on its acknowledgment of these issues’ interconnectedness and strengthen implementation of Resolution 1325 to increase the number of women on U.N. peacekeeping missions worldwide.

Including women in peacebuilding efforts gives many advantages. Simply facilitating women’s visible presence in U.N. peacekeeping brigades is sufficient to improve women’s rights advocacy during conflicts and ensure that women’s interests are better represented in negotiations afterwards. This is because female peacekeepers are more trusted by host communities, uniquely able to access women in conservative gender-divided communities, and able to provide safe spaces for local women to report sexual violence more often. These women can then receive support and pursue prosecution against the perpetrators. Most importantly, only greater women’s participation in the peace process can give women a voice in their future and ensure sustainable solutions that satisfy all stakeholders, male and female.

However, persisting gender inequalities continue to undermine Resolution 1325’s capacity to increase women’s role in conflict resolution and realize these benefits. The Resolution builds upon prior international women’s rights achievements, most notably the Convention to End All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the Beijing Declaration. Both contributed necessary but insufficient protections: while CEDAW legally bound states to condemn gender-based discrimination and advance towards full societal equality and human rights for women, the Beijing Declaration compelled the U.N. Security Council to act upon these foundational ideas and adopt Resolution 1325 along with Resolution 1889 for enforcement measures. Resolution 1325 is therefore the next step forward in a larger international framework for women’s rights, one whose goal of including more women in peace missions is supported by many world governments.

Despite this apparent global consensus, however, the gender balance remains badly skewed in U.N. peacebuilding operations. At the even the U.N.’s largest peacekeeping mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, a mere 2% of staff are female, while South Africa’s peacekeeping force with 13% women is praised as the most gender-integrated of all nations. Of those women, most serve in behind-the-scenes support roles rather than out on the front lines where their unique perspectives and capabilities could make the largest impact. Clearly, Resolution 1325 and its supporting international women’s rights framework still have not fully realized equal women’s representation after 15 years in existence. While these percentages of female peacekeepers are indeed larger than before the resolution, there are still too few to effectively bring a much-needed gender dimension to U.N. missions.

Resolution 1325’s primary fault is that implementation happens on a national level and is determined by national interpretation under the principle of state sovereignty. Since each member state decides how many of its women peacekeepers will join U.N. missions, the impetus to increase female representation must come from within each nation. Increasing women’s opportunities and gender equality domestically or mobilizing external governmental pressure from the international community are the best ways to improve women’s representation in peacebuilding missions, but it is also the responsibility of the U.N. to recruit more women in the peacekeeping forces to higher level positions.

Only with a reciprocal commitment from all U.N. member states to uphold the women’s rights ideals of Resolution 1325 can women be widely recognized as rightful participants in international peace processes. By improving equal gender representation in U.N. peacekeeping forces, women peacekeepers can better protect women’s rights during armed conflicts and promote long-term observance of gender equality and human rights in communities worldwide.

Megan Cansfield is a British-American dual national and 2017 graduate of the University of Michigan, where she concentrated in Political Science, International Studies, and Asian Studies. She is currently a Fulbright fellow at Yanbian University, where her research analyzes strategic linkages between the Korean Peninsula security crisis and US-China relations. In September 2018, she will begin her International Relations MA at the Yenching Academy of Peking University. Ultimately, Megan aspires to a diplomatic career with the US Department of State, specializing in bilateral and multilateral engagement with East Asian stakeholders to address wide-ranging regional and global peace and security issues.